Post navigation

Did the Ahl Al-Bayt named their children after the Caliphs and Sahabah?! Answering Yasser Al-Habeeb & other Shia apologists

Islam emphasizes that Muslims should have good names and give good names to their children. It is reported in a hadeeth that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said,

“You will be called on the Day of Resurrection by your names and the names of your fathers, so have good names.”

(Reported by Abu Dawud)

What about the Ahl Al-Bayt (whom the Shia claim to follow)? Have THEY chosen good and proper names for their progeny?

Many of you are probably aware of the (rather cheap) lame excuses Shias put forward when it comes to the issue of why ‘their’ Imams (throughout history) have chosen beautiful names such as :

– Abu Bakr – Omar – Othman – Aisha

… for their own children. There are a number of responses they give, among them is for instance that Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman were very common names back then i.e. naming your children after such names did not indicate any love to the first three righteous Caliphs (Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman). They try to be smart by saying for instance that many Muslims today carry the name Abdallah, does this mean that these (Sunni) Muslims are lover of Abdallah Ibn Saba’ (the Jewish founder of Shiism)? Of course, this is a Batil, Fahish i.e. corrupted Qiyas (which is completely forbidden in their cult anyway!), because there were many Sahabah before Ibn Saba’ who carried that name, even in Jahiliyyah. So they want to play the ‘Niyyah’ (intention) game, although it has nothing to do with love or hate or Niyyah but rather; “It is disliked to give your children the names of the enemies of Islam and Ahlul Bayt” (Rafidi belief). Accept it or reject it but don’t play with words, this is our answer to them.

So whatever next they bring will just further expose them, like when they say that as for Othman (one of Ali’s children and a neglected HERO at karbala by the Rafidah), then Ali certainly did not intend to name his son after the Chief of the Believers Othman Ibn Affan, the third Khalifah, rather he named his son after Othman Ibn Madh’oon (a companion of Ali), and as for Omar, then Ali named his son (most probably they say, with not evidence whatsover!) after Omar the son of Ummu Salamah (she liked that name too!) etc.

We have listened to some “lectures” of one of their scholar’s who comes up with every single lame excuse to somehow ‘explain’ how on earth the Ahl Al-Bayt (who according to Shias had the FULL knowledge of Ilm Al-Ghayb) could possibily chosen such hated (by their so called ‘followers’/’their’ Shia) names out of thousand, rather hundred thousand of names available back then:

Summary of what has been said and our rebuttal:

Yasser Al-Habib, the wretched Kafir says that there is not a single Hadith, neither in Sunni nor Rafidi books where Ali Ibn Abi Talib (RA) had said that he named his sons Omar and Othman after OMAR IBN AL-KHATTAB and OTHMAN IBN AL-AFFAN i.e. after the Caliphs. Then he goes on and says that all those names where very common back then (as if they are not common today …), so just because some of the sons of Ali carried the names of Abu Bakr, Omar etc. then this doesn’t give anyone the right to lie about Ali and to claim that Ali had chosen those names because of respect for the Caliphs. He says it is rather possible that Ali named his son Omar, after Omar Ibn Abi Salamah (the son of Umm Al-Mu’minin, Ummu Salamah).

Again the Jahil shows how hateful and biased the Rafidah are, for even if that is the case, then why don’t he and the Rafidah (throughout history) name their children OMAR in respect to Omar Ibn Abi Salamah and follow Ali’s Sunnah? After all they claim to follow and love him! Ironically it is the Ahl Al-Sunnah who followed this particular way of the Ahl Al-Bayt i.e. naming their children after Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman.

The Rafidah say that back then these names were common, well, so they are today. Didn’t the Rafidah ‘infallibles’ know what they do? Didn’t they know that one day their own so called followers (the Ahl Al-Bayt are innocent of the Rafidah as is the Messiah of the Messiah-Worshippers/’Christians’) are going tobe ‘holier than the Pope’ i.e. Rafidah today detest something, that the Ahl Al-Bayt did not detest for themselves (Ali would have gone certainly into prison if he would have been alive with his sons ABU BAKR, OTHMAN AND ALI, for all these names are detested in Rafidah socities AND in the Rafidi Republic of Iran! In fact, their own contradicting Ahadith expose their bias:

Imam Abu Jafar Al-Baqir) said:

إن الشيطان إذا سمع مناديا ينادي باسم عدو من أعدائنا اهتز واختال

“If the devil heard someone mention a name of one of our enemies he would be shaken (from their evil).”

So you can see how ‘evil’ the names of the enemies of the Ahl Al-Bayt are that if you mention them even Iblis would shake from how evil they are. Arch-enemies of the Ahl Al-Bayt acc. to Shiism: “Omar, Aisha, Abu bakr, Othman ect…” Now here’s the thing, it seems Shia Imams like to “Shake the Devil” by naming their own children after their enemies, for Shia Imams (out of thousands of names) chose Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman and even Aisha for their children.

Anyways, Yasser Al-Habib goes on and says since there is no clear-cut proof that Ali intended the Khulafa’ with those names, then we are not allowed to claim that he named his sons after the Khulafa’, those names were absolutely common among the Arabs back then (again this isn’t even a point, since the Jahil can’t change the fact that throughout Islamic history these names – i.e. Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman, Aisha etc. – were always common among Arabs and even non-Arabs, up to this very day!).

Then he says the they – the Rafidah – have narrations where it is clearly proven that Ali did not name his children in memory to the Khulafa’ Al-Rashidoon. There is a Hadith for instance by Imam Ali (AS) where Ali said that I named this son of mine Othman after my brother (in Deen) Othman Ibn Madh’oon i.e. he named his son after the Sahabi Othman Ibn Madh’oon, he did not say I named my son after Othman Ibn Affan. Well, this is not true according to supportivenarrations, even in the books of the Zaydi Shias:

Zaydi scholar al-Murshid Billah narrates with his chain in al-Amali al-Ithneeniyyah that `Ali (ra) says that he named after Othman Ibn `Affan and Omar bin Al-Khattab and Al-Abbas the uncle of the Prophet (peace be upon him):قَالَ الامام المحدث المرشد بالله

So we as Muslims could care less about fabricated Rafidi narrations (most probably even weak according to their OWN standards, as usual …), but the dilemma and flawed logic is that even if that is the case, then it still does not prove that the Ahl Al-Bayt did not named their children, or the children named themselves (with nicknames like ABU BAKR!) after the Khulafa’ and the Mother of the Believers (Aisha), due to their love for them. It is like doubting that the Prophet named one of his sons Ibrahim after Ibrahim Khalilullah (AS), just because there is no clear text proving it.

Would any Muslim doubt that the Prophet named his son after Ibrahim the Prophet? Certainly not. Also, there are NUMEROUS cases among the rest of the Imams who (nearly) all sticked to the Sunnah (of Ali) of giving such beautiful names such as Aisha, Omar etc. to their children, a dilemma Yasser Al-Khabeeth does not even address in the first place (he just tries to save the damage to his cult by trying to resolving the problem of why Ali has giving three of his children the names Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman!

We will come back to that later (the big dilemma he did not address in the first place!) Insha’Allah. The point is, it (his answer and the Shias usual way of somehow saving their skin) still proves to every unbiased researcher how BIASED the Rafidah and their clergy are, and how they clearly oppose the Ahl Al-Bayt in their way of name chosing, for names such as Omar and Abu Bakr were worthy and good enough to be given to Ali’s sons by Ali himself, so was the beautiful sounding name Omar (that name Rafidah detest MOST!), yet the Rafidah scholars literally discourage (oppose the Ahl Al-Bayt), in fact prohibit their followers to name their children after names such as Abu Bakr, Othman and let alone Omar. This is pure bias and here some examples:

Zindiq Sistani knows what is good, yet the Ahl Al-Bayt didn’t! It is (as usual) Rafidah against Ahl Al-Bayt!

and here the Rafidi Zindeeq Yasser Al-Khabeeth:

The Rafidah must be better in knowledge than their Imams regarding what is allowed and not allowed. So they have made naming of sons after names of enemies to be Haram, while their imams named their sons with those very forbidden names.

Ponder over that: If the Iimams named their sons Abu bakr , Omar and Othman after their own friends & companions (not Caliph Abu bakr, Omar and Othman but other Oma’r and Othman’s as the Shia claim), then why do the Shia not name their sons Abu bakr, Omar and Othman in love for the friends of your imams? Answer: Because Rafidah are biased and Rafidism is anything but the school of the Ahl Al-Bayt. Another example:

This is Al-Ahsaa’, one of the very few majority Shia areas of Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabian cities- just like other Muslims around the world – carry street names of the Ahl Al-Bayt (you can find Fatimah, Ali, Al-Hassan, Al-Hussein streets in Madinah, Makkah, Riyadh, nearly in every city! Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdel-Wahhab’s children were called Hassan, Hussein, Ali and Fatimah, and one of the Imams in Madinah is called Hussein Aal Shaykh from the descendants of Muhammad Ibn Abdel-Wahhab (i.e. Aal Al-Shaykh), then there is the Makki Imam, ALI Al-Hudhayfi etc.). The following street name however is named after ‘Othman Ibn Ali Ibn Abi Talib’ (the forgottten HERO of Karbala’ who is BARELY mentioned in Ashura ceremonies, you can guess why …), it is named after Ali’s son for Allah’s sake, yet the blind hatred of the Rafidah, their grudge, bias and OPPOSITION (despite their empty claims of being ‘followers of the Ahl Al-Bayt’) does not even spare the Ahl Al-Bayt themselves, hence this is what they’ve done:

This is the street in Saudi Arabia, and trust us, they don’t name their streets after the Ahl Al-Bayt out of love for the Shiites,let alone due to Taqiyyah, as a matter of fact they do so because it is the Aqeedah of every Sunni, Salafi Muslim to love the Ahl Al-Bayt, as it is written in every Aqeedah book, from Imam Al-Tahawi’s (Hanafi) creed to Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah’s (Hanbali-Athari). Nevertheless, above you can see that those animalistic Rafidah who are deprived of all common sense and stirred up with hatred of no limits in their Husseiniyyat-temples by their “Ayatullahs” have simply vandalised the street sign, simply due to their hatred for the NAME Othman. The street sign is named after Othman IBN ALI IBN ABI TALIB, not Othman Ibn Affan, so their hatred is in fact directed towards Ali, for he was the one who had chosen this name, the very name the Rafidah detest so much, rather the name the ‘Ayatollah’s regard as one of the names of the enemies of the Ahl Al-Bayt.

Back to Yasser Al-Habib. He goes on saying that he’ll challenge any Bakri (Sunni) to provide a single narration, even from their books where Ali said that he named his son Othman after Othman Ibn Affan, or Abu Bakr after Abu Bakr Ibn Abi Quhafa Khalifatul-Rasulullah, or Omar after Omar Ibn Al-Khattab. He says that just by trying so, the Sunnis will be exposing themselves, because Ali had no son with the name Abu Bakr, it has been mentioned that one of the sons of Ali was named Mohammad and his kunya (nickname) became Abu Bakr, it was not Ali himself who called him Abu Bakr nor nicknamed him as such, he says that these Jahil (Sunni) people can’t even distinguish between a name and a kunya (nickname).

The answer to the ignorance of this follower of a Neo-Persian-Majoosi sect, who does not know the ABC of Islamic and Arab culture:
First of all we don’t care about Rafidi narrations, also we don’t have such a thing that Ali named his son after Othman Ibn Madh’oon or Omar Ibn Abi Salamah or even Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, this is right, but at the same time we do not have a single narration that proves that the Prophet (peace be upon him), named his son Ibrahim, after Ibrahim Khalilullah, the Prophet of Allah. Now only a wretched person would try to speculate and argue that it was NOT out of love for IBRAHIM (that the Prophet named his son with such name) the PROPHET.

Also it is right that Ali did not name his son with a Kunya (today Arabs and especially many non-Arabs do so) i.e. Abu Bakr, but as the Khabeeth had to admit, it BECAME the nickname of Ali’s son, whose name was either Ubaydallah or Abdallah (not Muhammad) according to their top scholar and Zindiq Al-Majlisi. Also in Islamic culture father (especially in the Arab world) DO call their sons with nicknames, is is common to call even kids with nicknames such as Abu (fulan i.e. so and so, you can fill it with any name), even if they are kids obviously have no children themselves.

Even Rafidah scholars have to admit that the famous Kunya (nickname) of Ali’s son (Abdullah/Ubaydallah) was ABU BAKR, then what does this tell us? Rafidah can fool a bunch of non-Arabs maybe, but not Arabs and those who are familiar with Arabic culture, for a nickname is something many Arabs (especially in the past) were more famous for than their real names, and there are many examples such as;

Abu Lubabah, Abu Saeed Al-Khudri, Abu Ubaydah Ibn Al-Jarrah, Abu Hurayrah and many more (note that the biased Rafidah even attack the nickname of Abu Hurayrah which translates as ‘the father of the kitten’, claiming – as the Jahil Yasser Al-Habeeb and other Shia scholars do – that although the Prophet did call Abu Hurayrah by this very nickname, yet he (peace be upon him) intended to MOCK Abu Hurayrah by calling him ‘the father of the kitten’ (Abu Hurayrah). Now this can only come from a sick and perverted mind who thinks that the Prophet (peace be upon him) walked around insulting those whom he had taught the religion by calling them ‘father of the kitten’ (what sort of ‘insult’ is that anyway?! Besides, if one were to check the companions and how many of them held names of animals, go ahead).

By these three examples one can understand the old Arabian habit of calling people by their Kuniyah or Laqab or Ism. Yasser Al-Habib argument: “The Imams never called their sons Abu Bakr, it was only a Kuniya/nickname” or (as he adds): “Is it possible that Ali who was an eloquent speaker named his son after a NICKNAME (Abu Bakr)? Is nothing but a typical Straw Man Argument. In fact, one approach of their scholars is to refute ghosts i.e. an argument nobody made in the first place, for every Muslim (especially Arab) knows that Ali’s (and Al-Hassan’s AND Al-Hussein’s) sons had definatelly a proper name beside the Kunya/nickname of ABU BAKR, so nobody claimed that Ali gave his son (just like Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein) the NICKNAME of Abu Bakr as his one and only name, but what is definatelly possible is that Ali gave them the NICKNAME of Abu Bakr, and the least to say (which Arabs also do) is that the son of Ali (AND Al-Hassan AND Al-Hussein) gave themselves the nickname of Abu Bakr.

Hence the ignorant must know that not only did they call their sons Abdullah, but they also called them by the same exact Kuniyah as the first Caliph which is Abu Bakr. Now will they call this “normal and coincidence” etc. too?

Hopefully, this removes the delusion that some extremist Shia had that there were others who also had the name “Abu Bakr”, because there was only one man who was called `Abdullah and who was famously referred to as Abu Bakr and he is the first caliph Al-Siddeeq.
His last excuses are that the narration about Ali naming his son Abu Bakr are weak, and maybe his son had a son called Bakr and therefore became known as Abu Bakr (maybe, maybe argumentations …, there is not even a WEAK reference suggesting that). Like as if he cares about authenticity. Based on Qara’in (supporting evidence) we can easily claim that Ali and the rest of the Ahl Al-Bayt did intend to name their sons after Khulafa’, for it is too obvious for every researcher, after all Ali, Al-Hassan AND Al-Hussein have all given the names of all of the three Khalifah’s to their sons (Ali even had TWO Omar’s!).

The least to say is that it makes it a Sunnah of the Imams to use those names, so if the Rafidah were truthful they would have used those names with whatever intention they claim the Imams had (when given those names to THEIR children), but as we can see the Rafidah who CLAIM to follow the Ahl Al-Bayt don’t do what the Ahl Al-Bayt did, heck, they actually prohibit what the Ahl Al-Bayt did. He ends his lame excuses by answering the question with a question, he asks why the Caliphs did not name their children after the Ahl Al-Bayt? This (according Al-Habib) is an evidence for the hatred of the Khulafa’ towards the Ahl Al-Bayt. This statemend is so retarded, we answer it with the words of Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq himself:

Sahih Al-Bukhari 5.93:

Narrated `Uqba bin Al−Harith: I saw Abu Bakr carrying Al-Hassan and saying, “Let my father be sacrificed for you; you resemble the Prophet and not `Ali,” while `Ali was smiling.

Hatred? NOPE!

Also, NOT naming ones children after a specific name is not a sign of hatred, look at the names of the sons of Ali:

Not a single Muhammad among the son of Al-Hassan, yet Abu Bakr named his son MUHAMMAD, and Muhammad the Messenger of Allah is the HEAD of the Ahl Al-Bayt. Abu Bakr was also MUCH older than Ali, so it is naturally that Ali named his sons after Abu Bakr and Omar and not the other way around (also Omar did not name a single son of his Abu Bakr neither did Abu Bakr name a single son of his Omar). In his late years, Abu Bakr had a son and he gave him the name Muhammad, in love to the chief of the Ahl Al-Bayt, Allah’s Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). We hope the Rafidah are not going to say that that was not out of love or for some “other” Muhammad! Also, Omar IBN AL-KHATTAB married Umm Hakeem and she gave birth to FATIMAH bint Omar Ibn Al-Khattab (it is also reported that he had a daughter named named Ruqayyah i.e. he named his daughters EXACTLY as the Messenger عليه الصلاة و السلام did!):

So far we have seen that the Rafidah’s excuses and explanations of how Ali could had given his children names like Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman etc. did not help them much, since:

1. IF the Rafidah’s claim is true (Ali gave those names NOT in respect to the Khulafa’/Caliphs) then one can still see the opposition of the Rafidah to the Sunnah of their “infallibles” (giving names such as Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman etc. with the so called intention that Ali had!)

2. This explanation does not give us a logical reason of why one of the sons of Ali (Yasser Al-Habib calls him Muhammad, Shia scholars such as Majlisi are also confused, they say his name was either Ubaydallah or Abdallah) was known as ABU BAKR. A Kunya (nickname) is normally given by the father (Ali) to his son, but even if it wasn’t given to Ali, then the son of Ali clearly accepted that Kunya for himself for he was KNOWN by that name by ALL historians and even Shia scholars (like Majlisi) could not hide that fact. So it is a beautiful nickname of a great (forgotten) martyr of Karbala’, yet due to their bias and hatred the Rafidah don’t follow the Sunnah of the Ahl Al-Bayt and do not nickname themselves as Ali’s son did (or most likely Ali himself did for him), worse than that, they forbid their own people to carry such name.

Now quoting ourselves to put the nail into the coffin:

[…] then it still does not prove that the Ahl Al-Bayt did not named their children, or the children named themselves (with nicknames like ABU BAKR!) after the Khulafa’ and the Mother of the Believers (Aisha), due to their love for them. It is like doubting that the Prophet named one of his sons Ibrahim after Ibrahim Khalilullah (AS), just because there is no clear text proving it. Would any Muslim doubt that the Prophet named his son after Ibrahim the Prophet? Certainly not. there are NUMEROUS cases among the rest of the Imams who (nearly) all sticked to the Sunnah (of Ali) of giving such beautiful names such as Aisha, Omar etc. to their children, a dilemma Yasser Al-Khabeeth does not even address in the first place (he just tries to save the damage to his cult by trying to resolving the problem of why Ali has giving three of his children the names Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman!

Now that is the the sensitive spot and wound, and we won’t just put salt into that wound but rather curry and Indian spices, for the following is something that completely nukes all Shiite apologetical arguments away, hence Yasser Al-Khabeeth and most Shias don’t address it in the first place, good so, for it makes it so clear i.e. that the Ahl Al-Bayt having giving names AND Kunyas (nicknames) such as Omar, Abu Bakr, Aisha etc. was so common among them, that only a fool would think that it was just “coincidence” and in no relation to the Khulafa’ and the wives of the Prophet صل الله عليه و على آله و سلم at all. Let us take a look at a few useful posters and references:

NAMES THAT ALI LOVED (AND SHIA DETEST, SPOT THOSE)

Interesting isn’t it, Ali had TWO Omar’s (out of thousands and thousands of names he gave TWO of his sons the name of Omar, what a ‘coincidence’). And as you can see it was not just Ali who gave ALL the three names of the Khulafa’ to his children, even Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein named their sons after Abu Bakr and Omar, and so did the SON of Al-Hussein (Ali Zayn Al-Abidin) and so did … Also Abu Bakr is NOT a name, that’s right, it’s a kunya (nickname) and as a matter of fact this kunya was NOT even common during the Prophet’s/Sahaba’s time, and since it was not common and not even a name then it makes it even more problematic for the Rafidah for the following Ahl Al-Bayt Imams have named their children after Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman AND Aisha:

(note: The following sources are all Shia sources, also confirmed by Sunni sources (in any Nasab/Tarikh book). The Shia references are by major Shia scholars (like Al-Mufid), also keep in mind that we have included only those Imams of the Ahl Al-Bayt whom the Rafidah consider as Ahl Al-Bayt (as you know, the Rafidah expell all the Aaal Jafar, Aqil etc. and the wives form the Ahl Al-Bayt!) i.e. it does not include their sons who ALSO gave nice names like Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman, Talha, Zubayr and even Muawiyah to their children, like Muawiyah, the son of Abdallah IBN ABI TALIB (brother of Ali Ibn Abi Talib), see:

أنساب الأشراف ص60 – 68، وعمدة الطالب لابن عنبه ص 56.)

Muslims are bounded by the Sharia rulings. The Rafidah on the other hand are bounded on their whims and disires, and make halal what is haram and vice versa (like how their ‘scholars’ forbide their laymen to get married in the WHOLE month of Muharram because of the tragedy of Karbala’. A ruling that was NEVER set up by Islam, i.e. Allah and his Messenger. In Islam the ONLY period where getting married is forbidden is for those on Hajj who have put on their Ihrams). Ironically, one of the (heretics) who narrated (spread lies) about Imam Jafar Al-Sadiq (according to the Rafidi school) was called ‘Muawiyah bin ‘Ammar’, and not even a SINGLE Shia hadith claims that the Imam changed the name of his companion, not even amongst themselves. This is while the Prophet (peace be upon him) who wasn’t scared of any Kafir used to do the following:

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to change bad names to good ones.

Hadith – Al-Tirmidhi #4774

Now if the name Muawiyah would have been bad or inappropriate then surely, the great grandson of the Prophet (peace be upon him), Jafar al-Sadiq would have certainly changed the name of his companion, or at least giving him or calling him by another (more Rafidi like, such as Abdul-Hussein, Abdul-Zahra’ etc.) nickname.

The matter of fact is, a huge amount of the followers of the Shia and companions of Imams were called Muawiyah, heck even Ahl Al-Bayt themselves called their sons Muawiyah, such as Muawiyah Ibn Abdullah bin Jafar Ibn Abi Talib Al-Hashimi. Having said that, let us present you all the names the those who CLAIM to follow the Ahl Al-Bayt passionately detest, yet the Ahl Al-Bayt have chosen those names THROUGHOUT generations as names for their progeny (the Sunnis followed the Ahl Al-Bayt in using these names, the Shias abondened them!).

A`lam al-Nisa’ – al-Kahhalah – 4/260:Aisha bint Ja`far al-Sadiq, from the mistresses of worship and goodness, she used to say: “By your glory and greatness, if you make me enter the fire, I would grab my Tawheed with my hand and circle around the people of the fire telling them: I made Tawheed of him and he punished me.”

Aisha is from the daughters of Imam Musa and this was mentioned by many of the Shia scholars including Sheikh al Mufid in his “al-Irshad” page 303, “`Umdat al-Talib” by ibn `Anbah in the margin of page 266.

Shia scholar Ni`matullah al Jaza’eri writes in his “al-Anwar al Nu`maniyyah” 1/380:
“As for his children he has thirty seven sons and one daughter, from his sons are: `Ali al-Rida and … and his daughter Aisha“.

“Abu al-Hassan `Ali al-Hadi ibn Muhammad al-Jawad… His children: he had the Imam after him Abu Muhammad al-Hassan, and al-Hussein, and Muhammad who died during the life of his father, and Ja`far who claimed Imamah after his brother’s death and was called the Liar, and his Daughter Aisha.”

Ali Ibn Abi Talib’s son, his mother was Laylaa Bint Masood. He was a hero and martyr of Karbala’ (source: Al-Irshad by Al-Mufid, page 186-248, also in Tarikh Al-Yaqoobi the Shiite in the section of the sons of Ali and in Al-Muntahaa Al-Aamaal by Abbas Al-Qumi 1/261, who said that his name was Muhammad and his nickname was ABU BAKR (1/544) and in Bihar Al-Anwar by Majlisi, 42/120), or to put it in Majlisi’s words:

ABU BAKR Ibn Ali was DETERMINED to die with Al-Hussein, he was among the very first to step forward to fight, and he fought the battle of a HERO, he also didn’t ease off until he was martyred next to his brother Al-Hussein […]

ABU BAKR IBN ALI was from the foremost figures and Bani Hashimis and SONS of ALI to step forward and to FIGHT, yet Rawafidh know barely ANYTHING about him, yet they can even tell you the colour of the dress of the infant (Ali Al-Asghar), isn’t that dodgy, isn’t that BIASED, isn’t that the fear of the Rafidah “Ayatullahs” that the names such as Abu Bakr, Omar etc. will cast to much of a doubt into the hearts of the Shia masses? SURELY IT is!

Source: The book of Shirk, Bihar Al-Dhulamat, Jame’ Al-Khorafat wa Al-Zandaqa also known among Shias as “Bihar Al-Anwar”:

Manaqib al-Imam Ameer al Mu’mineen -Muhammad bin Suleiman al-Kufi – 2/48,50.
The news of `Ali’s children, he had from their mothers nineteen. those who are mentioned: `Ubeidullah and Abu Bakr and their mother Leila bint Mas`oud, and he said:”Abu Bakr was killed with al-Hussein. and al-`Abbas and Ja`far al-Akbar and `Abdullah and Umm `Abdullah they also died with al-Hussein PBUH, their mother was Umm al-Banin bint Huzam. Omar bin `Ali and Ruqayyah bint `Ali and they are twins, their mother is al-Sahbaa who is Umm Habib bint Rabe`ah. As for those who had a progeny from his sons they are: Hassan, Hussein, Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyah, al-`Abbas and Omar.

al-`Umdah – Ibn al-Batriq – p29,30.
And the children of Ameer al Mumineen PBUH are twenty seven (…) from them are Omar and Ruqayyah, and they were twins, their mother was Umm Habib bint Rabe`ah. al-Abbas and Ja`far and Othman and `Abdullah: The martyrs with their brother al-Hussein PBUT in Karbala, their mother is Umm al-Banin. Muhammad al-Asghar who had the Kuniyah Abu Bakr and `Ubeidullah are martyrs with their brother al-Hussein in Karbala their mother is Leila daughter of Mas`oud al-Daramiyah.

Mu`jam Rijal al-Hadith – abu al-Qassim al-Khu’i – 22/70:Abu Bakr bin al-Hassan from those who martyred between the hands of his uncle al-Hussein (as), it was mentioned that Salam should be sent upon him in Ziyarat al-Nahiyah al-Muqadassah and al-Ziyarah al-Rajabiyyah. Curses were sent upon his killer `Abdullah bin `Uqbah al-Ghanawi in the Ziyarah of al-Nahiyah.
al-Mufeed said in al-Irshad at the end of the section of the martyrdom of al-Qassim bin al-Hassan peace be upon them: `Abdullah bin `Uqbah al-Ghanawi shot an arrow at Abu Bakr bin al-Hassan peace be upon them so he killed him.

Sharh al-Akhbar – al-Qadi al-Nu`man al-Maghribi – (footnotes & commentary by Muhaqqiq al-Jalali) 3/177-195:
The children of al-Hussein (as): When al-Hussein (as) was killed in karbala, Abu Bakr bin al-Hussein was also killed along side him. Shot by an arrow that hit him, the one who shot him was Harmalah al-Kahiliy. His mother is Umm Walad (…) and his brothers from the children of `Ali (as): Othman…
al-Isfahani mentioned him in Maqatil al-Talibeen p57: and he did not mention his killer. and ibn al-Atheer mentioned in al-Kamil 4/75: `Abdullah bin al-Ghanawi shot Abu Bakr bin al-Hussein bin `Ali. al-Khawarizmi in his Maqtal 2/47: He is Abu Bakr bin al-Hassan and he was the one who recited the poetry in the battle field (he mentions it). Ibn al-Atheer said in al-Kamil 4/92: he is ibn al-Hassan (as) and his mother is Umm Walad, Harmalah bin Kahil killed him. And he was mentioned in al-Ziyarat al-Rajabiyyah which is found in Bihar al-Anwar 101/341.
Also he was mentioned in al-irshad and the two history books of al-Tabari and al-Mas`oudi. He mentioned this in Maqatil al-Talibeen p86 and added: Also in Karbala was killed Abu Bakr bin `Ali, his mother is Umm Laylah bint Mas`oud bin Khalid. It was reported from al-Baqir (as) that a man from Hamdan killed him. We find in al-Manaqib 2/107: From those who stood in the battle field was Abu Bakr bin `Ali and he was reciting poetry (he mentions beautiful poetry). al-Tabari said in Thakha’ir al-`Uqbah p117: his mother is Umm Laylah bint Mas`oud bin Khalid al-Nahshali, she was the one whom `Abdullah bin Ja`far married later after his uncle,and she bore him children.
It appears from all that we previously mentioned that three who held the Kuniyah “Abu Bakr” were martyred in Karbala: 1- Abu Bakr bin `Ali 2- Abu Bakr bin al-Hassan 3- Abu Bakr bin al-Hussein.
شرح إحقاق الحق – السيد المرعشي – ج 33 – ص 659
فقتل أصحاب الحسين كلهم وفيهم بضعة عشر شابا من أهل بيته منهم من أولاد علي عليه السلام : العباس ، وجعفر ، وعثمان ، ومحمد ، وأبو بكر ومنهم من أولاد الحسين : علي ، وعبد الله ، وأبو بكر ، والقاسم .
Sharh Ihqaq al-Haqq – Sayyed al-Mur`ashi – 33/659:
All the companions of Hussein were killed and they were more than ten young men from his Ahlul-Bayt, from them the sons of `Ali (as): al-`Abbas, Ja`far, Othman, Muhammad and Abu Bakr. and the sons of Hussein: `Ali, `Abdullah, Abu Bakr, al-Qassim.

Abu Bakr was THE Kunya of Ali Zayn Al-Abideen (another Kunya that was most likely given to him by the Salaf, some say Al-Zuhri), refer to Al-Anwar Al-Numaniyyah by the Shiite scholar Nimatullah Al-Jazaeri.

Abu Bakr was the Kunya (nickname) of Ali Al-Redha, this has been mentioned by the Shia scholars Al-Nuri Al-Tabrassi in his book Al-Najm Al-Thaqeb in the section of the nicknames and names of the hidden proof (“Mahdi”), he said: “Abu Bakr was ONE of the nicknames of Imam Al-Redha, as it has been mentioned by Abu Al-Faraj Al-Isfahani (the Shiite) in his Maqaatel Al-Talibiyeen.

Omar Ibn Al-Atraf Ibn Ali Ibn Abi Talib. His mother was Ummu Habib Al-Sahbaa’ Al-Taghlubiyyah from the Ridda wars. Sources: Silsilah Al-Alawiyyah by Abu Nasr Al-Bukhari the Shiite, page 123 in the section of the lineage of Omar Al-Atraf, also in Al-Muntahaa Al-Aamaal by Abbas Al-Qummi the Shiite 1/261 who said: “OMAR and Ruqayyah Al-Kubra … Also in Bihar Al-Anwar by Al-Majlisi 42/120.

Mawsu`at Shahadat al-Ma`soomeen (as) – Committee of Hadith in Baqir al-`Uloom institute – 1/268:The sons of Ameer al-Mu’mineen are twenty seven males and females: from them (…) Omar, `Uthman, Muhammad al-Asghar who has the Kuniya of Abu Bakr.[443]-35- ibn al-Taqtaqi said: He (as) had progeny through five children: al-Hassan and al-Hussein (as) and Muhammad bin al-Hanafiyyah and al-`Abbas and Omar al-Atraf.

Omar ibn al-Taghlubiyyah and she is al-Sahbaa bint Rabe`ah from the captives taken after the attack of Khaled bin al-Walid in `Ein al-Tamr, This Omar has aged until eighty five years so he acquired the half of `Ali’s PBUH inheritance, this is because all of his brothers – `Abdullah, Ja`far and `Uthman- they were all killed with Hussein PBUH before him in Karbala so he inherited them as well.

Omar #2

This is Omar Ibn Abi Talib, also known as Omar Al-Asghar, he was martyred in Karbala.

al-Mustajad min al-Irshad (al-Majmou`ah) – al-`Allamah al-Helli – p138-152: Chapter of mentioning the children of al-Hassan bin `Ali PBUT and their numbers and names:The children of al-Hassan bin `Ali PBUT are fifteen males and females (…) from them Omar and his two brothers al-Qassim and `Abdullah, their mother is Umm Walad.

Bihar al-Anwar – Majlisi – (footnote) 97/154:
The books of Ansab(genealogy) did not mention among the children of `Ali bin al-Hussein al-Sajjad (as) one by the name of Othman, Yes there is one among them called Omar and he has the title of al-Ashraf, and this Hadith is narrated in Kamil al-Ziyarat. as we previously saw and it doesn’t mention Othman. So it is strange that the researchers of al-Kafi’s new print in Tehran didn’t pay attention to this.

Omar son Musa Ibn Jafar (Al-Kadhem) son of Muhammad son of Ali son of Al-Hussein son of Ali Ibn Abi Talib

al-Irshad – Sheikh al-Mufid – 1/354,356.
Mentioning the children of Ameer al-Mumineen PBUH and their number and their names and a brief summary of their lives. He PBUH had twenty seven children: from them is Omar and Ruqayyah who were twins, their mother was Umm Habib bint Rabe`ah. al-`Abbas and Ja`far and Othman and `Abdullah were martyrs with their brother al-Hussein bin `Ali PBUT in Karbala, their mother was Umm al-Banin bint Huzam bin Khaled bin Daram. Muhammad al-Asghar who had the Kuniyah Abu Bakr and
`Ubeidullah are martyrs with their brother al-Hussein PBUH in Karbala, their mother is Leila bint Mas`oud al-Daramiyah.

One thought on “Did the Ahl Al-Bayt named their children after the Caliphs and Sahabah?! Answering Yasser Al-Habeeb & other Shia apologists”

Glory be to the One Who makes the truth clear!
No matter what ridiculous excuses these people make up they will never, ever name their own children ‘Abu Bakr’ or ‘Aisha’.
They will never do it, not even to follow the Sunna of their own Imams.
The difference between the religion of the Rafidites and the Sunna of the Ahl al Bayt, may Allah be pleased with them, is clear-cut.